Skip to content
The Enfranchisement Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

The Enfranchisement Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$781k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$329k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$3.7MHealth$515kCivil Rights$330kEnvironment$242kPublic Benefit$115kInternational$43kArts & Culture$27kCommunity Improvement$25kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $5k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $150k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $297k
  • $250k+1 grant · $329k
$25,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$17M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE PHILANTHROPIC COLLABORATIVE FOR EDUCATION$328,987
ALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION$196,580
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND$50,000
REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION$50,000
MEDSTAR GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL$40,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON$25,000
CHOOSE CHICAGO FOUNDATION$25,000
UNESCO$25,000
THE JEWISH ELECTORAL INSTITUTE$25,000
MOBILES FOR EDUCATION ALLIANCE$10,000
WASHINGTON HEBREW CONGREGATION$1,800
Individual grant recipient$1,300
WETA$1,000
CITIZENS ASSOCIATION OF GEORGETOWN$1,000
OCEAN CONSERVANCY$18
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 96% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%KEHILAT GESHER USA: $13k → 10%MIT DAF - THE LEEDS FUND: $100k → 8%NEW MEDIA VENTURES EDUCATION FUND: $10k → 10%NEW MEDIA VENTURES EDUCATION FUND: $10k → 10%CORNELL UNIVERSITY: $25k → 6%PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION: $20k → 17%CHOOSE CHICAGO FOUNDATION: $25k → 14%MEDSTAR GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL: $40k → 6%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON: $50k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON: $25k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION: $25k → 17%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON: $25k → 14%UNESCO: $25k → 17%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON: $15k → 14%UNESCO: $18k → 17%RESOURCE IMPACT: $423k → 14%THE PHILANTHROPIC COLLABORATIVE FOR EDUCATION: $329k → 14%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $60k → 14%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $50k → 14%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $50k → 14%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $50k → 14%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $25k → 14%RESOURCE IMPACT: $17k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION: $500k → 14%NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION SUPPORT FUND: $430k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION: $388k → 14%NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION SUPPORT FUND: $310k → 14%NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION SUPPORT FUND: $300k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION: $204k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION: $197k → 14%NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION SUPPORT FUND: $125k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION: $90k → 14%NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION SUPPORT FUND: $75k → 14%NATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION SUPPORT FUND: $135k → 14%MEDSTAR GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL: $50k → 14%THE JEWISH ELECTORAL INSTITUTE: $50k → 14%NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA FOUNDATION: $70k → 14%LCV EDUCATION FUND: $25k → 14%REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%THE JEWISH ELECTORAL INSTITUTE: $25k → 14%REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%THE JEWISH ELECTORAL INSTITUTE: $25k → 14%NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%NEW VENTURE FUND: $20k → 14%AMALGAMATED FOUNDATIONDEMOCRACY ALLIANCE POOLED FUND: $40k → 14%AMALGAMATED FOUNDATIONDEMOCRACY ALLIANCE POOLED FUND: $25k → 14%AMALGAMATED FOUNDATIONDEMOCRACY ALLIANCE POOLED FUND: $20k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON: $80k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
MA
OR
OH
CA
CO
VA
MD
DE
DC
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.3M · 21 repeat orgs$689k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +30% since the first grant, against +8% for those funded once.

21 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
16

Total granted

$4.3M
$332k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
+8%

Still filing today

76%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $357k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’21’22’23’24’25
EducationEnvironmentHealthArts & CulturePublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • RI
    RESOURCE IMPACT
    2× · 2021–2022 · $439k · revenue +121%
  • LO
    LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND
    5× · 2021–2025 · $235k · revenue +39%
  • RF
    REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION
    6× · 2017–2025 · $230k · revenue +240%

Funded once

  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METRO WASHINGTON DC
    one grant, 2017 · $155k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $100k
  • Cornell University
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +15%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
The George Washington University

The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…

Education
2
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
3
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
4
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
5
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
6
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
7
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…

Social Science
8
The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit
9
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—
10
Competitive Enterprise Institute

Competitive enterprise institute (cei) is a non-profit public policy organization dedicated to the principles of free enterprise and limited government. we believe that consumers are best helped not by government regulation but by being…

—
11
Partnership for Public Service Inc

Making our government work better is a daunting task, and we are a small organization seeking to transform a government that employs millions of civilians and manages trillions of dollars in taxpayer revenue needed to protect public…

Employment
12
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners

Founded in 1889, the national association of regulatory utility commisioners (naruc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state public service commisions who regulate the utilities that provide essential services such…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Grantmakers for Education; the most unlike its peers is Citizens Association of Georgetown. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

27 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 27 of the 44 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/27
Grantees still filing
18/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION INC: $1,378,495 · EducationALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION INCRESOURCE IMPACT: $439,495 · EducationRESOURCE IMPACT+4 more: $47,250 · EducationNATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION SUPPORT FUND: $1,375,183 · Public BenefitNATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION SUPP…THE PHILANTHROPIC COLLABORATIVE FOR EDUCATION: $328,987 · OtherTHE PHILANTHROPIC COLLAB…REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION: $230,000 · OtherREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR…PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METRO WASHINGTON DC: $155,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ME…Individual grant recipient: $100,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipie…AMALGAMATED FOUNDATIONDEMOCRACY ALLIANCE POOLED FUND: $85,000 · OtherAMALGAMATED FOUNDATIONDE…UNESCO: $42,500 · Other+19 more: $137,350 · Other+19 morePLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON DC INC: $195,000 · HealthTHE MEDSTAR-GEORGETOWN MEDICAL CENTER INC: $90,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $45,000 · Health+1 more: $10,000 · HealthLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $235,000 · EnvironmentNEW VENTURE FUND: $20,000 · Environment+4 more: $5,519 · EnvironmentJEWISH ELECTORATE INSTITUTE: $100,000 · Civil RightsCHOOSE CHICAGO FOUNDATION: $25,000 · Community Improvement
Education$1,865,240Public Benefit$1,375,183Other$1,078,837Health$340,000Environment$260,519Civil Rights$100,000Community Improvement$25,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetALLIANCE FOR EXCELLENT EDUCATION INC: $1,378,495 over 5y, 9.2% of budgetNATIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION SUPPORT FUND: $1,375,183 over 6y, 13% of budgetRESOURCE IMPACT: $439,495 over 2y, 20% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $235,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION: $230,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON DC INC: $195,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetJEWISH ELECTORATE INSTITUTE: $100,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetTHE MEDSTAR-GEORGETOWN MEDICAL CENTER INC: $90,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $45,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCornell University: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOBILES FOR EDUCATION ALLIANCE: $20,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMASONIC MEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetOhio Progressive Collaborative: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCAPITAL AREA FOOD BANK INC: $7,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER WASHINGTON EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION INC: $6,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCitizens Association of Georgetown: $4,800 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetGRANTMAKERS FOR EDUCATION: $1,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SCHOTT FOUNDATION FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJewish Women International: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SHAKESPEARE THEATRE: $500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $251 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetDENVER BOTANIC GARDENS INC: $250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWASHINGTON DRAMA SOCIETY INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $18 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Caroline & Sigmund Sc…The William & Flora H…WK Kellogg FoundationThe Ford FoundationNational Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Caroline & Sigmund Schott FundMA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Caroline & Sigmund Schott Fund · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · WK Kellogg Foundation · The Ford Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Enfranchisement Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Enfranchisement Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Enfranchisement Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Enfranchisement Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 44 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Enfranchisement’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home